Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but I honestly can't figure out what you're trying to say. It seems there are only four possibilities:
1) Investors get nothing.
2) You make a payment to investors from your own pocket.
3) You pursue going through Giga's claim process and pass any funds you reclaim to investors.
4) You pursue some other source of recovery, such as suing GLBSE or negotiating with Giga, and pass any funds (perhaps less expenses) you reclaim to investors.
I think your comments rule out 1 and 3, but I'm not quite sure. You seem to be hinting at something with "This however has no bearing on the investors' rights", but I can't figure out what. Are you deliberately trying to be vague and evasive or am I missing something?
I'm neither trying to be vague nor to be evasive. I'm trying to separate that which can in fact be answered (what MP will do) from that which cannot in fact be answered (what will happen in the future). Any attempt to conflate elements drawn from these two distinct groups will result in partial answers, only to the first part, for the pretty good reason that nobody can answer as to the second part.
Obviously I understand that everyone would very much want to know "what will happen". Heck, so would I. How do you practically go about it? One day GLBSE is fine, the next it's awol. One day Nefario is giving out info, the next weeks he's not. Then he is. Then the lists are broken. Then Giga wants a ream of paperwork. Then new lists come up. Then who exactly knows what tomorrow brings? I'm sorry, but I can't answer that. All I can say are basic things such as yes, MPEx will pay legitimate claims. Of course it will. Will X claim be legitimate? I don't know. Nobody does. We'll have to get there and see.
Otherwise, the situation is something like this:
a)Mircea Popescu made a pass-through of a GLBSE asset, at no cost, with no performance (which literally means, he was not going to do absolutely anything other than send the money received along to investors).
b)The GLBSE asset was destroyed.
c)The GLBSE asset issuer is trying to create a replacement, which is laudable, but he's doing it in such a way as to put more burden on the pass-through operator than he either promised or offered to take. This is understandable, from that issuer's perspective, for a variety of reasons already discussed in the respective threads, but the fact that it's understandable doesn't make its effects go away.
d)It is possible that in the future some BTC will flow to ex-GIGAMINING holders through this replacement scheme.
So, investors in F.GIGA.ETF may be entitled to some sort of compensation, but conceivably not until such a time as Giga pays something, not unless they actually claim it and likely a fraction thereof. The complexities of "exactly how much" are significant, and at the rate this is going I imagine will have to be established by Rota.